[geeks] electric cars

[Charles Shannon Hendrix]

On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:24:46 -0400 (EDT)
adh at an.bradford.ma.us (Sandwich Maker) wrote:

> " I think a plant locally is experimenting with it, but most of what
> we " have locally is using agri-waste and trash-fuel conversions.
> 
> ...and agri-waste has large amounts of cellulose in it?
> 
> likewise trash.

All I know is that this was listed, last time I looked, as a separate
project.

I assume it has something to do with the methods used because the plant
I'm talking about can also use oil, gasoline, food, glass cleaner, and
all kinds of stuff as input.

I would assume that a cellulose->alcohol system is more geared toward a
limited spectrum of inputs.

> " Rust can be taken care of, and not all cars rust severely even in
> the " rust-belt.
> 
> if it can be taken care of, why hasn't it?  

Who says it hasn't?

Most cars rust due to a lack of maintenance or poor design, and even at
that I see the bodies and frames outlasting the drivetrains.

The average car gets replaced at only 5 or 10 years, mostly because
either the drivetrain is bad, or costs so much to maintain.  

If the body needs work and the engine is bad, the car gets tossed.

However, in cases where the body needs work and the engine is good,
people are much more willing to put money into the rest of the car.

> why would electric cars be different?

I didn't say they would.

I just said they could last longer because you could replace the engines
easier.  That gives more incentive to maintain the rest of the car.

Right now even if you can maintain the body and frame, it is really
hard to maintain the engine, especially when new engines are so
expensive and often will not work in old cars.

> " but most people could change an electric
> " motor with little trouble.  It is also easier for mechanics, though
> " they might not be happy about that, I don't know.
> 
> i think you're overestimating the mechanical skills and/or motivation
> of 'most people'.  yes, the electric motor would be simpler, but still
> not simple enough for the mechanically challenged, and its weight
> isn't likely to ever be low enough to easily lift in one or even two
> hands.

No, I don't think so.

For one thing, a lot of people already do their own engine
maintenance.  Those people will find an electric replacement fairly
easy.  Those on the fence would cross over.

Those who aren't motivated would still benefit from lower maintenance
and easier replacement.

*PLUS*, everyone could benefit from the fact that it is easier to build
electric motors that can be used in a lot of different vehicles, or
even specialized custom motors for the enthusiasts.

> then again, if they're cheap enough they might be viewed as
> disposable...

Not the whole car, no.

If the engine gets cheap enough but the rest of the car doesn't then
engine replacement becomes an easier and more attractive option than
buying a new car.

> digression: my gf was pointing out that all the folks who object to
> the windmill farm -way- off the coast of martha's vineyard have no
> problem with telephone poles right in front of their houses...

They also have no problem with infrastructure being put in *MY*
backyard for *their* benefit.

> " People will forget to charge, and then try to charge at work, during
> " their lunch hour, etc.
> " 
> " Peak charging loads will follow people's habits just like sewage,
> water " usage, and traffic systems do already.
> 
> true, unless they have sufficient counter-motivations.

Well damn... *EVERYTHING* is true with sufficient motivations.... :)
 
> you could have differential rate pricing, so that off-peak was much
> cheaper and on-peak much more expensive.

Yes, though I would point out that this and similar ideas have been
tried many times before for similar reasons, and the result was much
wailing, moaning, and gnashing of teeth, to the point where most of it
was abandoned.

For example, where my grandmother used to live CP&L tried alternate
rates and the people bitched the idea out of existence.

Personally I think it might be a good idea, but not how they tried it.

Instead of lowering the rates during off-peak hours, they raised the
rates during peak hours.

The opposite would probably have been welcomed.

The other problem is there isn't a lot of power using devices in common
use at the time for people to run off hours.

> you could make charging your car during peak hours ticketable, like
> parking in a loading zone.

I think that's a terrible idea.

There are perfectly valid reasons for needing to charge during the day.


-- 
shannon "AT" widomaker.com -- [Don't you see that the whole aim of
Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make
thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in
which to express it. -- 1984, George Orwell ]]